Monday, June 08, 2015

I've had a couple of threatening e-mails from supporters of Ms. Gallo's position, warning me that if I (and/or other indie authors) call for a boycott of Tor books, they'll call for a boycott of my/our books in return. This made me laugh out loud. As those of you who've read my books will know, I don't think I can be described as 'progressive' or 'SJW'. Heck, read the header of this blog - it'll tell you in a nutshell my position on most things! I have grave doubts whether readers of the progressive persuasion have ever bought my books - so why would a boycott from that part of the reading spectrum hold any fears for me?

No. It's becoming increasingly clear that the problem lies in the corporate culture that's taken over at Tor Books and Tor.com. Four individuals currently or previously associated with Tor's management and publishing activities at a senior level have now made statements that I can only regard as biased beyond logical comprehension. They are Patrick Nielsen Hayden (manager of science fiction books at Tor); his wife Teresa Nielsen Hayden (listed by Wikipedia as a 'consulting editor' for Tor Books, and formerly a senior editor there - also the publisher of the well-known web log and forum 'Making Light'); Moshe Feder (also a consulting editor for Tor Books); and Irene Gallo (Associate Publisher of Tor.com and Creative Director of Tor Books). Certain Tor-published authors, primarily John Scalzi but also including others, have spouted the 'party line' in their support and/or on their own account as well.

There's an old military saying when bad things happen: "Once may be an accident. Twice may be coincidence. Three or more times is enemy action." In the same way, I could understand one senior Tor representative holding such views. I might even accept two. Four is too many. This is not coincidence. It's concerted, organized, deliberate enemy action. Tor as a publisher appears to either espouse, or tolerate (and actively encourage), views like this. The utterances of these individuals appear to indicate that the company supports lies, slander, libel and viciousness as debating and/or promotional tactics. I hope that the reality belies that appearance; but that's for Tor to say, not me - and back up their words with actions. Weasel words will no longer be acceptable in any way, shape or form.

THIS CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE.

It won't be. Let them threaten. What are they going to do, continue to not buy books from Castalia House, from Baen, and from independents? Are they going to keep not reading what they repeatedly proclaim to be terribly written bad-to-reprehensible works without ever having read them? What are they going to do, have the Board vote me out of SFWA again? Are they going to continue not giving Nebulas to John Wright, and Sarah Hoyt, and Larry Correia, and Brad Torgersen? The reality is that we have the decisive advantage here because we have long supported them.

But we don't have to.

I have can count dozens of Tor and Forge books on my bookshelves surrounding me, and that doesn't count the bookshelves in the halls, in the bedrooms, and in the attic. But I don't have to buy any more. Why should I, when the Senior Editor of Science Fiction at Tor has done nothing for me except insult and attack me for ten years now? A lot of people are getting sick of their constant bullshit, even people who have absolutely nothing to do with me in any way, shape, or form.

"I'm an author, involved with the publishing industry. Does that mean that I have the moral authority to point out to you that she is making actual, factually untrue statements here? She might be a really wonderful individual, in person, but her facts are dead wrong, bordering on libelous, and taking a position on a hotbutton issue really undercuts Tor's credibility as a politically neutral, or even tolerant, business."
- Jim Butcher, author, The Dresden Files

Apparently the bestselling and Hugo-nominated Mr. Butcher didn't much appreciate being described as an author of "bad-to-reprehensible" books.

Back in April, Larry Correia and I, among others, encouraged everyone to leave Tor Books out of it. We made it clear that our problems were with certain individuals at Tor, not the organization itself. But as Peter Grant points out, Irene Gallo's comments, to say nothing of Moshe Feder's and John Scalzi's (now that the organization has bet its future on him, Scalzi is relevant in this regard), appear to indicate that we were wrong and our problem is with the organization as it is presently comprised after all.

What do you think? I'm interested in hearing everyone's arguments, pro and con.

If you were taking the total war approach, Tor is either the enemy, or else it is harboring, protecting, and sustaining the enemy. Are there innocents in Tor? Perhaps. But they've been given warning. Those who stay do so at their own personal risks. If the only thing that will force Tor to clean house is enough people refusing to buy their books, then so be it. Collateral damage is acceptable.

If this is 4GW, then Tor might be a necessary evil. The institution appears to be a magnet and rallying point for SJWs. They are more likely to show their faces because they feel like Tor gives them protection. Keeping Tor on life support might draw a few more foes out.

I never thought there was any doubt that the power movers at Tor, and therefore the company as an entity, were firmly in the enemy's camp. Sure, some individuals that work for Tor may not be, but as as whole they are the SJW Reich.

Vox, I mostly follow this stuff through your posts. It seems to me that if multiple members of senior management at Tor can say outrageous, even libelous, statements over and over with impunity, whether it's by design or happenstance, Tor itself should at this point be held responsible (and thus legitimately subject to boycott).

A) The powers at Tor have been talking publicly about engineering the future publications since at least 1992.B) The decline in mass (single author exceptions) quality of SF from 1995-2015 at Tor is measurable.C) The media mouthpieces for Tor require more than a lone badmouthing PR person.D) Not one Tor rep has come out in favor of their own books for the Hugos.

For the far left everything is personal. If they choose to leverage, or allow to be leveraged, their careers and companies to wage war then I say we finish what they started.

If you act as a professional I'll consider your product. Deliberately insult me and you'll *NEVER* see another penny from me. And if you're lucky I'll just ignore you.

Let's put this in context. They are a small company in a niche market competing against indie publishers, other small publishers, e-books, every other medium of entertainment, and the accumulated writing history of mankind. And they choose to piss on their biggest revenue source. They ain't rocket scientists. Hell, after this year they mostly won't be rocket recipients either.

Since Macmillan Publishers Ltd was fined for corruption in Africa:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2011-07-22/macmillan-publishers-must-pay-18-million-for-africa-corruption

The company has implemented a strong internal anti-corruption stance that has made waves throughout the company.

These 4 Tor managers could have incurred in unethical behavior as defined by the published code of conduct:http://se.macmillan.com/FILES/CODE-OF-CONDUCT/

Macmillan even has a channel to denounce such violations:http://speakup.macmillan.com/Template.aspx?Language=English

It’s uncertain what would happen if the unethical behavior of those 4 managers were to be reported, specifically:- Gaming award ceremonies to unethically inflate their sales.- Promoting fake reviews of competing products, harming fair trade.- Libeling and mischaracterizing competing authors, opening the gates for lawsuits.

It would be a total shame for these poor 4 Torlings if several minions came across this information and were to document and denounce their violations of the code of conduct. I beckon everyone not to write a properly worded message with support evidence of his or her transgressions as it might affect their employment and career opportunities, after all they would never do that to other authors.

Whenever someone on the right gets fired because they express opinions that the left disapproves of and it is pointed out that firing someone because of their political beliefs is not conducive to a civil society and perhaps we should all agree to disagree someone always pops up to state that "opinions have consequences."

They then go on to state that firing someone for their political views is not a free speech issue and that if you don't want to get fired then you shouldn't express such views, especially since they are self-evidentially evil.

I say it is high time that those of us on the side of civilization make sure that "opinions have consequences" applies to the other side as well. I certainly will not be buying any books published by Tor. After all, why would I wish to give money to people who deem me a Nazi?

It really is just that simple. Don't buy things from people who think you are a Nazi.

If the powers that be at Tor were in disagreement with what members of their management are espousing publicly they would have been censured long ago. The fact that Hayden et al speak with impunity tells us everything we need to know about the depth of the rot within that organization. They are enemies indeed.

Any thought of boycott has a problem in the numbers. What numbers would Tor listen too? Are there enough of us who would actually boycott? Boycotting a gas company has an immediate effect; Tor takes time.

Unlike Gamergate and Gawker, Tor does not have advertisers to sustain them. Whom Tor advertises with, now that may be an opening. Also, this concerns more than Tor and their readers. What these four people have said reflects on everyone not holding their opinions. Are these four not indirectly saying the same thing about games?

At this point I'm afraid Tom Doherty is an old lord of the manor held prisoner by his attentive and caring servants.

Sure he can fire them but the manor house will collapse without them.

SJW Entryism appears to be complete at TOR books. It would take a Night of the Long Knives to get it back under Tom's control and he can only do that if he has an entire management team ready to take over if he throws PNH and his crew under the bus.

Why does it take people so long to adapt to a new situation? This is a war. Peter Grant said it: "Four is too many." The rot is institutional. There are millions of Irene Gallos waiting to take her spot.

I have a problem though, because I will definitely preorder the final Count to the Eschaton books.Granted, i don't want to cross subsidize the morlocks with no chests, but having my own hardcover copy is not negotiable.

Gallo has cost Tor a great deal of business Goodwill. To put a test valuation on it in the manner of a step function input, say US$1,000,000.00 So the company’s value is decreasing not only due to sagging sales and the recent loss of control over the Hugo and other awards, but also to the reticence of current and future customers, current and future authors, and anyone who might care to work there anymore. (Come to think of it, we might soon see some of the employees bail and tell.) They are losing their cred.

Most good corporate execs have read their Machiavelli. He would counsel them to annihilate not only the Prince, but all of the Prince’s court and all of his relatives. This is commonly done in a takeover. Changing out one or two key people doesn’t work. The new people pick up the old culture and continue it. So Macmillan can either continue with a losing proposition, attempt to save the ship with a new crew, or cut the unit loose before its valuation hits the bottom.

Once the pigsty is cleaned out, the sow can no longer return to her mire.

"Any thought of boycott has a problem in the numbers. What numbers would Tor listen too?"

Yep, we're defeated before we even start. Lets just give up. Its silly to fight back or injure the other party that's attacked you, unless it can proven in advance that you have 100% chance of winning. And while we're at it, wouldn't a real Christian just turn the other cheek?

I am but a faceless minion of the most vile sort, but as our Evil overlord has permitted me to scratch crude pictographs into mud outside my hovel so that I might express my desires in this matter, I have little choice but to comply:

This made me laugh out loud. As those of you who've read my books will know, I don't think I can be described as 'progressive' or 'SJW'. Heck, read the header of this blog - it'll tell you in a nutshell my position on most things! I have grave doubts whether readers of the progressive persuasion have ever bought my books - so why would a boycott from that part of the reading spectrum hold any fears for me?

Now... just to get more people to understand this and to stop caving and bowing to these idiots.

How much of Tor is pink? My guess is well greater than 50%. People who would probably boycott I think already do - they don't buy the pink and I regard the ~JCW blue as gravy for Tor, not the meat. If ~JCW were the meat, would Tor be permitting of these four?

The pink wouldn't boycott; they'd probably buy 2 or 3 copies in support of Tor.

Here's something of interest from a bit of knob-slobbery that PNH recently wrote about his boss Tom Doherty on the occasion of his 79th birthday.

As it happens, the Ace (Books) that Tom inherited had some unresolved business problems and some unpaid debts. Tom tells the story of his first World Science Fiction Convention, in Kansas City in 1976. On entering the storied Muehlebach Hotel, he was confronted by a prominent SF author well-known for his, shall we say, forceful manner of speaking. “I’m with the Science Fiction Writers of America,” declared this writer, in a voice that shook potted plants thirty feet away. “And we are going to Audit. Your. Books.”

If you are boggling at the idea of a SFWA President who stands up for his writers rather than arrange sweetheart deals for SFWA officers. The nameless author in question was Dr. Jerry Pournelle,

Larry Niven relates a much funnier version of this event, with names included. The debts PNH mentioned were residuals, which ACE never paid to authors. Never. The advance was it, you were never going to see another dime in those days if you sold to ACE. Everybody knew it except Tom Doherty.

It says a lot about the guy that he actually tried to make good on the outstanding residuals.

I would see the cancer at Tor eradicated. They still publish a handful of authors I love and Macmillan really does need a SciFi imprint, but I'm not sure they need a hyphenless feminist couple, nor a bad whine on their staff and I think it needs to be made painfully clear to those with the authority to clean house, that a house cleaning is in order.

I don't think we need to do anything, this is moving of its own free will. Some SJWs might decide to personalize their loss, blame it on these few and cut their losses. It's clear this bit of the Tor crew is over the top and they may be responsible for whipping up all the negative media coverage and poisoning the debate. They're a liability for their own side. I'd say if we were in charge, we'd want toxic behaviors reduced, but at this early stage, having mean spirited enemies is a plus.

I am absolutely astounded you ever decided to leave Tor out of it. I am surprised you are just now, and just contemplating, going tit for tat instead of being an immobile target. I like to think of you as intelligent, and willing to get in there. And, often, you are. So I have never understood your tolerance at being targeted by Tor.

Yeah, sure, I might not know all the ins and outs of what is going on. Just what you publish, what others have mentioned, and a few other sources. Don't care. Wouldn't have waited, wouldn't have tied myself up like that. Cut those ropes and burn some bridges. Or keep getting smacked around like a red-headed step child.

I only care as an irritated onlooker. But just as some guy who keeps taking jabs from "his friend(s)", I won't get involved if that's your thing. I don't care, in that sense. Just irks my sensibilities, nothing personal.

I have no problem boycotting Tor, sure it means I'll have to exercise longer time preferences on enjoying Count to Eschaton, as well as the works of Mr. Williamson and a few others. But there is so much out there worth reading that I can wait until Tom, Tor, or Pan - Macmillan come to their senses. When I checked it out, I was shocked how much I was spending with them. Well stop the presses. I'm spending no more until they make it clear they want me and my ilk as customers. Frankly last year my spending was Toe, Baen, Castalia, Roc. I'll have to rectify that this year.

While it would be best if Tor Books jettisons the ballast; my personal options for must-reads or must-haves would be to buy from a used book reseller (so it's a copy already-sold and you don't inflate their numbers) then send a personal donation directly to the author.

Going for individuals at Tor and and not for them directly (in light of Tor clearly making their feelings known) is like attacking the VC inside Vietnam but refuses to pursue them in to Laos, China and Cambodia. you'll neutralize a few enemies, but never the entire threat. It might have only been the Haydens, Scalzi etc saying it at first, but they've made it clear they threw all their weight behind stomping down the sad puppies and rabid puppies as a threat to their hegemony in SFF. I see no reason to ignore that they ARE a party to the fight now.

So, why NOT to attack them with everything you have at this point, since they've been lured into the fight. They've made slanderous and libelous statements, call them on it, make them rescind them or pay the consequences.

So I'v been reading Moby-Dick (2nd chapter) and I have once more been met with the utter loathsomeness of SJWs.

I binged some informiation about the Lazarus bit in the chapter. (thought it was the one revived by Jesus) Read the following links and tell me if you can recognize the telltale snarky faggotry so common in their writing.

http://celesteh.blogspot.de/2008/08/moby-dick-monday-chapter-2.html

"Alas, I am in a state of shocking internetlessness, so I'm citing no sources here."

D'aww, he said "internetlessness".

""Such dreary streets! blocks of blackness . . . on either hand . . .." Unlit streets in the dark and cold and ice. Perfect! He comes to an open door and to some racism."

Yes, jude a 19th century author by concepts invented by 20th century Bolshevists.

"Gomorrah was an Old Testament city destroyed by fire and brimstone. Lot lived there and was a good guy. Some angels described as travelers came to see him. The townsfolk were a xenophobic bunch and demanded that Lot bring out the strangers so they could know them. Lot offered his two virgin daughters instead, hoping his neighbors would be content to rape his kids."

Do I really have to say anything?

"Ok, so backing up to Gomorrah, you may have noted that the sequence of events in the story makes no sense whatsoever, aside from establishing Lot as one of the worst parents of all time."

Marrying off your daughters (something that was necessary for them to find husbands) is the worst thing a father could do. You heard it first here, folks.

" I've heard two interpretations of the meaning of that story. The most reasonable one is about hospitality. Travel was dangerous in the ancient world and there were no such things as inns. So if somebody strange came to town, rather than treating them as a thief and marauder (which they might actually be) you were supposed to give them a place to sleep without overly interrogating them. God was pissed off because the citizens of Gomorrah wanted to know something about these guys before letting them. Take note: God is against border patrols interrogating travelers."

I want to beat this faggot until his kidneys stop functioning.

"However, alas, sexual otherness and racial otherness have long been popularly tied together in America. In movies, a jazz theme in the soundtrack = easy woman, for example. This expands in concentric circles of sexual impropriety as all alien others stand in for each other. Insufficient whiteness, insufficient masculinity, insufficient heterosexuality are all equivalent, so black = womanly = promiscuous = queer = gay.

So when Melville invokes Gemorrah, he's foreshadowing on several levels. It's a Biblical reference, so it foreshadows a church scene in general. It's queer, so it foreshadows blackness."

This shitstain actually thinks that "queer" meant the same thing in the 19th century as it does today. Priceless.

Don't be so quick to dismiss "progressive" readers.I'm slogging through Sword of Truth by Terry Goodkind (which starts of great, but later books get bogged down in Objectivist lecturing every few pages)So say I find that brand of philosophy unsavoury is an understatement, but politics are besides the point when reading.I enjoy different points of view, and I can appreciate better the values of people that DO adopt such philosophy (which are remarkably similar to my own :P)I don't disagree that SJW are awful and unlikely to look beyond their echochambers, but "progressive" is a broad term. Don't go throwing the baby out with that nasty soiled bathwater!

I'm glad to see neutral parties wading in to comment (okay, mostly being dragged in my JUST how unreasonable your opposition seems intent on being)It seems to have drawn out a "employees opinions are their own" nonsense statement from TOR PR, so they know they've fucked up.I'm hoping reasonable voices can agree to disagree on personal/political matters and get on with the business of publishing and publicising awesome fiction ><

I think I've only bought one Tor title in the last five years; a Brandon Sanderson novel that I couldn't read more than about a third of before giving up in boredom. So, me boycotting Tor is exactly what Peter Grant is talking about: who cares? I'm already not really a customer and haven't been since I stopped reading the Wheel of Time years ago.

However, as a publisher of genres that I do enjoy reading, I'd like to think that I could give Tor a look-see in the future. But I won't until this is addressed. Since by boycott threat is pointless, who can I contact at Tor or McMillan to let them know of my displeasure with the comments of these four specific individuals and the culture that evidently allows them to say what they say publicly? I'm more than happy to "#GamerGate" the crap out of them.

I don't mind that writers don't agree with me,. Seven billion carbon copies of me would be a real boring world. I do start to get pissed when the ban-hammer at a certain site starts enforcing a conformity of opinion on race, sex, etc., to even erase people of color that didn't agree with the blogger. Or that I, as a potential future writer, must write women as Mary Sue 90 lb. super-waifs. Or that I must write in "non-binary gender," whatever that might mean. Or that readers should ignore me because I'm a white, straight male because of "privilege." Or that to call out the company for any of this is to have my posts disappear down the memory hole r cmpltly dsvwld s frm f rdcl. Or to be called a wrongfan by editors that work for the company. Or that if you find a Puppykicker, they tend to work for or have been published by Tor. I don't care that Tor might be leftist. There are other Three Letter SFF publishers that are, that I buy from on occasion, and that have not provoked an utter shitstorm on a near regular basis. I do, however, return unto Tor the contempt and antipathy that they show anyone who isn't in complete lockstep with their opinions.

The libel deserves the deguello... though they may choke on feigned civility in the future, the sjws need some manners school'n. It also ratchets up the cost of their behaviors to include the personal risk where the cheat codes won't work.

I don't disagree that SJW are awful and unlikely to look beyond their echochambers, but "progressive" is a broad term.

No it's not.

Don't go throwing the baby out with that nasty soiled bathwater!

There's no baby there, just bathwater. With feces.

I'm hoping reasonable voices can agree to disagree on personal/political matters and get on with the business of publishing and publicising awesome fiction

These are either the words of a moderate who incorrectly sees this as a spat between two equally reasonable/unreasonable sides who happen to have different beliefs, or the words of a SJW who hopes to leverage the decency of his enemies by getting them to sue for peace before they realize they're winning.

Either way, we don't care. Go talk to the SJWs who started this war. Get them to surrender unconditionally, then we can talk about reparations for the last 50 years of damage they've done. That sounds reasonable.

Today as I was at Barnes and Noble (there to buy the "Weird Al" edition of "Mad" magazine), I thought I'd thank the store for carrying the magazine by buying a book, too. "Shipstar" by Niven and Benford caught my eye, and I would've bought it if I hadn't first asked myself "who's the publisher?"

When I saw the spine of the book, I put it back on the shelf, and searched some more. I'm now the happy owner of "Skin Game", which I've wanted to finish ever since reading the sample in the Hugo packet.

As I recommended to Mr. Wright, he needs to have his agent or attorney contact Macmillan management. Point out that Tor managers are trash-talking one of their Hugo-nominated authors - which will adversely impact sales.

This hits THEIR bottom line. Not to mention Wright's. To say nothing of the libel.

Macmillan needs to clean Tor up, for the sake of their own bottom line. A suit by John Wright might get expensive.

I like the idea of a personal donation directly to the author. I can almost guarantee you would get a nice Thank You email. Say, to a Wright, a Kratman, a Pournelle, etc.

By reseller I'm assuming any old used book seller? Only problem, of course, is when someone like John C. Wright comes out with his latest. Goodness, I wish he, among others, would go full time with Castalia House.

Going for individuals at Tor and and not for them directly (in light of Tor clearly making their feelings known) is like attacking the VC inside Vietnam but refuses to pursue them in to Laos, China and Cambodia.

If only we could have B-52s drop several million tons of high explosives on their heads, as we did in Laos and Cambodia...

Going after Jim Butcher? Talk about fratricide. The man is a Liberal, quite doctrinaire, feminist too.

Despite that that he is a good guy and can still tell a fine story, the Dresden Files are fun .

As far as future purchases, well I don't any SF or Fantasy in the queue but I can be sure till this issue is resolved, none of them are going to be for TOR. From now on till solution, the moniker means put it back or buy it used.

I might grab another Dresden Files later though, my buddies like them and I've enjoyed the half dozen I've read too. I even enjoyed the short lived TV show

There's no reason to stoop to subterfuge or misrepresentation. I wrote them today and in full honesty let them know that I am a voracious sci-fi reader and have purchased Tor books as recently as just a couple of weeks ago. I also let them know I didn't appreciate being called a "neo-nazi" or a "racist," particularly since my wife is part Native American.

Hi, Vox. Thanks very much for linking to my post about the Gallo/Tor issue. I appreciate your interest, and the comments of your minions. Good minions! (Tosses expensive puppy chow . . . ) Sorry I didn't comment earlier, but I've been on the road all day and only just found your post.

I'm grateful to all of you who participated in the comments over this post. I'd be very glad if you would please e-mail or write to Tor and McMillan to let them know of your interest, and concern. I want to put them on the spot, force them to respond publicly. If they don't, I think their silence will be all the confirmation we need that my suspicions about Tor are correct, and that it's become the literary version of the Mos Eisley cantina.

I hope this incident will encourage all Puppies, Sad, Rabid or just plain playful, to work together to deal with the situation. If we stand united, I think great things may be achieved.

SJWs are the monsters created by progressives. Now some Progressives should be taken out and shot, like Alinsky, while others are the friend whom you politely ignore when he starts ranting about corporate shills (Eric Flint). However, all progressives, collectively, are responsible for the creation of the modern* SJW horde.

*There have always been some folks who form irrational ideological tribes and attack "others" on a personal, rhetorical level.

So does anybody here recall Sean Fodera? It was just last year that he made some mildly critical comments about MRK. The SJWs exploded about the misogyny, the brutal victimization, blah, blah, blah. Long story short, Fodera, a McMillan employee made a very public apology, presumably on orders. We'll see if history repeats itself.

I am surprised at how little Tor fiction I've read. Goodreads doesn't let you sort by publisher, so I'm not entirely sure, but it looks like my Tor exposure is limited to Soldier of the Mist, the Dying Earth omnibus, Other Kingdoms, and Three Body Problem. I guess they won't miss me too much, but I'm clearly not going to miss them greatly.

Back in April, Larry Correia and I, among others, encouraged everyone to leave Tor Books out of it. We made it clear that our problems were with certain individuals at Tor, not the organization itself. But as Peter Grant points out, Irene Gallo's comments, to say nothing of Moshe Feder's and John Scalzi's (now that the organization has bet its future on him, Scalzi is relevant in this regard), appear to indicate that we were wrong and our problem is with the organization as it is presently comprised after all.

When the leaders of a company are your enemy, the company is your enemy. It is only when those leaders are removed or battered into honest submission that peace can be an option.

Hi, Vox. Thanks very much for linking to my post about the Gallo/Tor issue. I appreciate your interest, and the comments of your minions. Good minions! (Tosses expensive puppy chow . . . ) Sorry I didn't comment earlier, but I've been on the road all day and only just found your post.

Peter, I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm not familiar with your work, but as you've shown courage enough to take a stand in this fight, I've just purchased 'Take the Star Road'. Keep up the good work!

Tor Books ‏@torbooks 2h2 hours ago Happy Monday! We appreciate your comments & would like to remind you that the views of our employees do not reflect those of the publisher.

So yeah, I'm thinking that if one of their employees had said anything about the "bad-to-reprehensible" works of their black or gay authors, they'd be reminding us that "these people are no longer our employees" not just that "the views of our employees do not reflect our views".

For myself, I will no longer purchase the Tor books that I normally would - Weber and Modesitt in particular. Instead, I've purchased Peter Grant's Laredo books. I'll wait for the others to show at Bookman's used books, where I can avoid providing Tor with any income.

Tor, you've just lost ~$150 a year (I like hardbound books). Unnoticeable, surely, but how many more will you lose?

If I had to pick, going forward, exclusively between Castalia or Tor, Tor would not win. And it's a shame - they have done so much for the genre in the past. And Castalia does not publish hardcover books (right?) - which literally forced me to get an e-reader. But I still prefer the real deal.I spend about $200 or more a year on books.

Just bought a Tor book a couple of weeks ago. It was the only John Wright paperback on the shelf. That will be the last Tor book I buy. Henceforth I'll buy John's books from Castalia or at the used bookstore.

Two people were FIRED for privately making "forking" and "dongle" jokes at a Python conference. I don't expect Gallo to resign. She has no honor, and thinks she's above it all. I want her FIRED. Anything less? Tor delenda est.

Hi Minions (Since I haven't commented before I don't want to commit a faux pas, is minions right?), Peter asked me to step on over and see the comments. I'd seen that you all were coming to my blog today, hopefully you got some useful information. Vox, thanks for the links. I appreciate it, it helps to know I'm not shouting in the wind.

Hi Cedar. Only a small percentage of us are Minions. The folks here aren't the type who like to form a Group and refer to themselves with a cutesy name like "Trufans." There are some loosely defined constituencies amongst the mob of individuals.

Buster! Can't you recognize an opportunity to be funny? Don't you think it would be a useful item to add to your intellectual toolkit to becapable of saying, when a ton of wet steaming funny lands onyour head, "My goodness, this appears to be funny?"

Vile minion here. Faceless too. Have number. Member of cutesy name group. Not think for self. Follow Overlord of Evil League of Evil. Think number funny. Recognize number useful in other ways too. Mainly funny though.

Oh, I recognize that. Relates to herding cats :) Since I lovingly call my children my minions, I can clearly see the funny in it. Also, I belong to a couple of groups with cutesy names myself, although 'trufan' is emphatically not one of them.